Dear Wiki Researchers,
Maybe you know or not, but we are intending to submit an EU COST Action
<https://www.cost.eu/> at the end of the month to support a network of
Academic Wikimedians, especially to host meetings and develop additional
grants in the future. Here
<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1D6Thim7W8xRO0q1f1wUcS3acWz7QC_HZDWhgHVZ…>
is the draft along with last year's version and the feedback we got, which
we think was good enough to try again.
Technically we have enough people (need people from minimum 7 nations) and
more than last year (about 20 so far). But, *given that the project is
intended to mostly support young researchers, women, and also people from
inclusiveness countries,* who can also be more difficult to reach, we put
out another broad call also for suggestions e.g., phd students, or ways to
get in contact with such people.
--
Additionally, i want to point out that i tried to contact some of you
through the research person's databases, but it is very difficult to find
emails for you and in some cases they bounced, so I ask you to reach out
here if you want to be involved or know more.
Finally and as always, we also welcome and encourage you to join the
WikiScience
Hub <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Science_Hub>, which is an outgrowth of
the COST action application from last year.
Thank you,
Brett and all other COST Action/ ScienceHub team members
Hi all,
I hope this email finds you well.
The Research team at the Wikimedia Foundation is hiring a Research
Scientist to focus on Knowledge Integrity research. Please review the job
description linked below and apply if interested, or consider spreading the
word!
Position Details: https://job-boards.greenhouse.io/wikimedia/jobs/7484474/
Application Deadline: January 15th, 2026
If you have questions, please don't hesitate to reach out.
Best,
Miriam
Hi everyone,
If you are interested in one/some/all of the projects and initiatives that
the Research team [1] at the Wikimedia Foundation is driving or is heavily
involved with, our bi-annual Research Report is a good place for you to get
a high level update about our work, including our work to strengthen the
Wikimedia research community.
We have published our 13th bi-annual report at
https://research.wikimedia.org/report.html which captures the work of
the team, our research fellow, our contractors, our past and current formal
collaborators [2] as well as volunteers who worked with us during July to
December 2025. In the report you can also find information about upcoming
events as well as reflections about important trends.
We hope you enjoy reading parts or all of the report. And if you have
follow up questions about an item in the report, you're welcome to
follow-up through the usual channels, including our public office hours [3].
With gratitude,
Leila,
[1] https://research.wikimedia.org/team.html
[2] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Collaborators/Archive
and https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Collaborators
[3] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Research/Office_hours#Schedule
--
Leila Zia
Head of Research
Wikimedia Foundation
Hello,
I’m looking for a research partner to explore the following topics:
-
Universal Knowledge Repository — its rationale, scope, and key components
-
Wikipedia as a foundation for a Universal Knowledge Repository
I am a hands-on builder, and I have already created a working prototype of
a Universal Knowledge Repository (see Research Question #6 below). I’m
seeking help with: (1) exploring and formalizing the theoretical concepts
(see Research Questions #1–5), (2) analyzing and quantifying the outcomes
of implementing a Universal Knowledge Repository, (3) presenting results in
an academically appropriate format, and (4) writing and submitting
grant/funding applications (e.g., to the Wikimedia Research Fund or other
programs).
------------------------------
Research Question #1
If Wikipedia were defined not as an online encyclopedia, but as a universal
knowledge repository, what would it look like?
Research areas:
-
- Define a Universal Knowledge Repository
- Rationale
- Scope
- Key components
- Wikipedia as a local maximum of a Universal Knowledge Repository
- Wikipedia as a foundation for a Universal Knowledge Repository
- Wikipedia as a forum rather than an encyclopedia
- Talk pages as forums
- Mainspace articles as a transient output of talk-page discussions
- The creation of an editor community as the most valuable outcome of
Wikipedia’s existence
- The editor community as valuable in itself, separate from its
output (articles for readers)
- Where does the editor community go if its volunteer role in
knowledge organization is reduced or replaced by AI?
Research Question #2
Is a humane social networking service an essential part of a Universal
Knowledge Repository?
Research areas:
-
Define a “humane” social networking service
-
Show that a humane social networking service is an essential part of a
Universal Knowledge Repository
Research Question #3
Is a focus on knowledge an essential basis of a humane social networking
service, as a way to shift attention away from social-comparison races?
Research areas:
-
Social comparison, mimetic desire, self-esteem
-
How integral these concepts are to human psychology
-
How these should be managed and accounted for in a humane social
networking service
-
Addictive feeds/streams — what makes a stream addictive vs. useful
-
Identify main methods to “detoxify” social networking services, such as:
-
shifting focus from unproductive social comparisons to knowledge
organization
-
removing like/follower counters as ego metrics
-
providing customizable, non-addictive feeds aimed at
professional/educational growth and real-world connection
Research Question #4
Is outsourcing most of the knowledge collection and organization to AI
required to compile a Universal Knowledge Repository?
Research areas:
-
Estimate the need to outsource some of the knowledge collection and
organization to AI
-
Consequences of outsourcing a substantial part of knowledge collection
and organization to AI
Research Question #5
What types of users exist in a Universal Knowledge Repository, based on
motivation (intent)?
Research areas:
-
User types by motivation (intent)
-
Funding and business model of a Universal Knowledge Repository: how
motivations of different user types could be used to support it
-
How to make development and innovation in a Universal Knowledge
Repository sustainable
Research Question #6
Implement a working prototype of a Universal Knowledge Repository with
humane social networking capabilities.
Partially done and available for review. Example:
https://www.hubbry.com/University_of_Lviv
Research areas:
-
Hubs — collections of pages organized hierarchically, used to collect
and organize knowledge
-
Personal hubs
-
Common hubs
-
Wikipedia articles as seeds for common hubs
-
Subpages — enabling hierarchical knowledge organization
-
Standard ways to describe rules for knowledge organization and
verification per page and its subpages
-
Standard ways to describe requirements for perspectives / points of view
to be represented on a page and its subpages
-
Page types by content:
-
Media pages — collecting media as an independent page type
-
Notes pages — collecting text snippets as an independent page type
-
Notes pages — use cases for quick knowledge organization and
unstructured data organization
-
Notes pages with columns — use case for work coordination
(Kanban-like pages)
-
Comments on pages
-
Impact on readers’ perception of knowledge presented on a page
-
Impact on editors’ motivation when comments are present
-
Separate discussion spaces (forums and chats) related to—but not
directly attached to—a page (hub-level forums and chats)
-
User profiles with extended functionality (subpages, discussion
channels) — “personal hubs”
-
Impact of extended social profiles on editors’ motivation
------------------------------
If you’re interested, I’d be happy to share additional details, discuss
possible research directions, and align on what a collaboration could look
like.
Best regards,
Bohdan
Dear Wikimedia Research community,
We are happy to announce the launch of this year’s Wikimedia Research Fund.
The full details about this round, including eligibility criteria,
submission instructions, and timelines can be found at [1].
Similar to the past cycles, we have made some changes to improve the
Research Fund. For this cycle, we decided to restore a two-stage
application process for research proposals (Type 1) and extended research
proposals (Type 2). However, instead of asking for a 1000-word Stage I
proposal (which we did in 2024), we ask for a shorter Letter of Intent. Our
primary goal with this change is two-fold: a) ask for more detailed review
on a smaller subset of applications which are assessed to have a higher
chance of acceptance and through that better utilizing the scarce review
resources of the Wikimedia Research community; b) ask for less work from
the applicants in the first stage and only ask for more when we assess the
chance of acceptance to be higher. The application process for events and
community building proposals (Type 3) remain unchanged.
The key dates are as follows:
* Letter of Intent submission deadline (Type 1-2 only): January 16, 2026
* Notifications for decisions on Letter of Intent submissions (Type 1-2):
February 6, 2026
* Full Proposal Submissions (Advanced Type 1-2 and Type 3): April 3, 2026
* Final Notification: May 1, 2026
You can find more information about the call for proposals on Meta-Wiki [1].
If you have any questions, feel free to reach out to us at
research_fund(a)wikimedia.org or book an office hour [2]. We are looking
forward to receiving your proposals.
Best,
Kinneret, on behalf of the Research Fund Organizing Committee [3]
[1]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Research_%26_Tech…
[2]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Research_%26_Tech…
[3]
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:Programs/Wikimedia_Research_%26_Tech…
--
Kinneret Gordon
Lead Research Community Officer
Wikimedia Foundation <https://wikimediafoundation.org/>
*Learn more about Wikimedia Research <https://research.wikimedia.org/>*
Hello everyone,
The next Research Showcase will be live-streamed this Wednesday, December
10, at 9:30 AM PT/17:30 UTC (find your local time here:
https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1765387800). *We invite you to watch via
the YouTube stream at **https://www.youtube.com/live/h99DbWx0cKY
<https://www.youtube.com/live/h99DbWx0cKY> *and join the conversation in
the YouTube chat as soon as the showcase goes live.
This month's presentation is a *panel discussion on experimentation on
Wikipedia*. We’ll be discussing what online experiments are, examples of
experiments that have been done on Wikipedia that have been impactful, and
challenges to overcome with running online experiments- in general and on
Wikipedia specifically.
The panel will be moderated by Debra Kumar (WMF) with panelists Morten
Warncke-Wang (WMF), Neil Thompson (Massachusetts Institute of Technology),
and Yan Chen (University of Michigan).
Also, as a reminder, in January we will celebrate *25 Years of Wikipedia
and the Research Behind It.* This will be more of a gathering than a
showcase, and a chance to celebrate our collective work and connections
from across the Wikimedia research community. Save the date and join
us on *Thursday,
January 22, 17:30 UTC *(find your local time here
https://zonestamp.toolforge.org/1769103000). More details will be shared in
the new year.
We hope you can join us!
Best,
Kinneret
Call for Papers: “In Defense of the Commons”
communication +1, vol 12
Guest edited by Zachary McDowell, Steve Jankowski, and Matthew Vetter
**Premise**
As the Internet becomes more and more of a walled garden, projects like Wikipedia, fondly known as “the last best place on the Internet,” were founded on the utopian promise of a decentralized, collaborative, and nonproprietary model for creating and sharing “the sum of all human knowledge." Wikipedia remains a shining example of the digital “commons” — repositories of knowledge and information that have become infrastructural layers that support the Internet as we know it. Beyond Wikipedia and its sister projects, the digital commons also includes open source software projects (Debian, Pubpub), shadow libraries that circulate publicly-financed research, and interoperable interfaces (like RSS feeds, APIs). These institutional mechanisms of content, whether knowledge, data, multimedia, or code, eschew exclusive traditional methods of property rights in favor of social governance, harnessing diverse, non-market motivations to create shared public goods.
However, the ideal of the commons as an open, equitable, and self-regulating space exists under constant pressure, for many reasons. Internally, these projects are not the "mythical egalitarian space" they are often described as. They are characterized by power asymmetries, systemic biases, and complex bureaucracies that can exclude newcomers and marginalized communities who may wish to negotiate and challenge established norms. Externally, the knowledge commons has long been threatened by corporate free-riding. Today, new forms of this concern have arisen with extraction and enclosure of the commons through large language models (LLMs) which repurpose volunteer labor and open data in ways that may undermine the sustainability of the projects themselves.
In light of these concerns about inaccessibility, inequity, and encroachment, we seek to bring together critical scholarship that examines the sociotechnical, political, and ethical challenges facing digital knowledge commons today. In coordination with the “Critical Commons Research Network” (https://criticalcommonsresearch.net/), communication +1 is accepting proposals for a special issue "In Defiance of the Commons / In Defense of the Commons." We invite contributions that not only diagnose the problems but also explore the strategies of resistance, repair, and rehabilitation necessary to sustain these vital public resources. We are interested in work that follows controversies, uncovers hidden infrastructures, and listens to the voices of the communities that build and maintain the commons.
We welcome submissions from a range of theoretical and methodological perspectives that address, but are not limited to, themes around governance, power, and bureaucracy in the commons, including issues of governance capture, automated systems, and divergent governance models; bias, exclusion, and the politics of representation, including editorial and informational biases, systemic issues, knowledge organization, and strategies of resistance; and the commons in the broader information ecosystem and infrastructure as it comes into contact with enclosures from two opposing ends: the systems of intellectual property that seek to restrain public use and the corporate LLM systems that are continuing the legacy of platformisation by positioning themselves as the de facto governors and gatekeepers of our common knowledge. We especially encourage approaches inspired by or relating to the above concerns to the physical, environmental, or generally “public” commons as well (forestry, fisheries, mining, public health, etc.), which might help bridge conversations between seemingly disparate disciplines. Ultimately, this CFP seeks to understand not just what is at stake with contemporary shifts in how the commons is being exploited, but also to promote the actions, materials, and imaginations needed to increase the sustainability, longevity, and resilience of the digital commons.
**Submission Details**
Please submit proposals of 500-1000 words (maximum) to communicationplusone(a)gmail.com<mailto:communicationplusone@gmail.com> by January 15th. Authors will be invited to submit full-length manuscripts around the beginning of February, with full papers due May 15th. Full papers may vary in length but typically range from 6,000 to 9,000 words (excluding references). This issue will be published in the Fall of 2026.
**about communication +1**
Since 2011, communication +1 has operated as a diamond open-access journal, publishing fee-free for both authors and readers.
The aim of communication +1<https://communicationplusone.org/> is to promote new approaches to and open new horizons in the study of communication from an interdisciplinary perspective. We are particularly committed to promoting research that seeks to constitute new areas of inquiry and to explore new frontiers of theoretical activities linking the study of communication to both established and emerging research programs in the humanities, social sciences, and arts. Other than the commitment to rigorous scholarship, communication +1 sets no specific agenda. Its primary objective is to create a space for thoughtful experiments and for communicating these experiments.
For more information, please visit communicationplusone.org<http://communicationplusone.org/>.
**Bibliography**
Cooke, Richard. "Wikipedia Is the Last Best Place on the Internet." Wired, (February 1, 2020). https://www.wired.com/story/wikipedia-online-encyclopedia-best-place-intern…
Fuchs, Christian. “The Digital Commons and the Digital Public Sphere: How to Advance Digital Democracy Today.” Westminster Papers in Communication and Culture 16, no. 1 (March 22, 2021). https://doi.org/10.16997/wpcc.917.
Reeves, Neal, Wenjie Yin, and Elena Simperl. “Exploring the Impact of ChatGPT on Wikipedia Engagement.” Collective Intelligence 4, no. 3 (2025): 26339137251372599. https://doi.org/10.1177/26339137251372599.
Pentzold, Christian. “Mundane Work for Utopian Ends: Freeing Digital Materials in Peer Production.” New Media & Society 23, no. 4 (April 1, 2021): 816–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820954203.
Vetter, Matthew A., Jialei Jiang, and Zachary J. McDowell. “An Endangered Species: How LLMs Threaten Wikipedia’s Sustainability.” AI & SOCIETY, February 19, 2025. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02199-9.
**advisory board**
Sean Johnson Andrews, Columbia College Chicago
Lisa Åkervall, University of Gothenburg, Sweden
Nathalie Casemajor, University of Québec Outaouais
Jimena Canales, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign
Bernard Geoghegan, Kings College, London
Lawrence Grossberg, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
David Gunkel, Northern Illinois University
Peter Krapp, University of California Irvine
Catherine Malabou, Kingston University, United Kingdom
Jussi Parikka, Aarhus University, Denmark
John Durham Peters, Yale University
Amit Pinchevski,The Hebrew University of Jerusalem
Florian Sprenger, Ruhr-University Bochum, Germany
Ted Striphas, University of Colorado, Boulder
Christina Vagt, University of California Santa Barbara
Greg Wise, Arizona State University
Love and respect, and RIP to our advisory board member, Johnathan Sterne. Thank you for everything.
Matt Vetter, PhD (he/him)
Professor of English
Dept. of Language, Literature, and Writing
Indiana University of Pennsylvania
http://mattvetter.net<http://mattvetter.net/>
Connect with me on Zoom,
https://iupvideo.zoom.us/my/dr.vetterzooms
Managing co-editor, Writing Spaces<http://www.writingspaces.org/>
Co-chair, CCCC Wikipedia Initiative<https://cccc.ncte.org/cccc/wikipedia-initiative/>
Available as open access ebook, Wikipedia and the Representation of Reality<https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/oa-mono/10.4324/9781003094081/wikipedia…..>